Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nadín Ospina

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 04:27Z

[edit] Nadín Ospina

Nadín Ospina (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Colombian artist. Self-promotion. Is he notable? -- RHaworth 00:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC) NB. My "vote" changed - see below.

• Mixed. A quick review shows a lot of ghits for an artist from a non-english-speaking, not-internet-saturated country, so I'd guess that he is notable. Looking through his website (which I ended up having to find here due to malformed HTML), he seems to have been included in some significant shows and books. However, the article does not demonstrate that notability, and may be some sort of copyvio. I'm going to notify the creator/subject on his talk page and see if he's willing to clean it up to approach wikipedia standards. Argyriou (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC) Keep after rewrite. Argyriou (talk) 15:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Mixed Article has many statements that are probably OR or CV. It can probably be recreated with proper info. Keep I had no doubt that the person was notable, and it has been proven so. Xiner (talk, email) 01:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, the rewritten article does a much better job explaining why this artist can be considered notable, and does so without violating WP:COI or WP:COPYVIO. --Kyoko 11:10, 7 February 2007 (UTC) Mixed This artist's works seem to have been widely exhibited around the world, but I'm not certain if that satisfies WP:BIO. I don't want to simply vote delete because the artist may be significant within a certain area that I'm not familiar with. The article itself needs at the very least considerable improvement to address the concerns raised above. --Kyoko 02:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - I've left a long note on User talk:Nadinospina to give him a chance to clean the article up. Argyriou (talk) 02:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Umm.... What exactly is "Mixed"? I've never seen this used before in afd... Bwithh 04:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Stubify/keep The subject seems to be an encyclopedically notable artist, but this article appears to have WP:COI and WP:COPYVIO problems. Not only that, it represents Mr. Ospina in an unbalanced way (perhaps due to the lifting of text from the Holly Crawford book (which is entirely about Mickey Mouse)... the fact that a link about her book is placed above the link to Mr. Ospina's site seems to be bit of a warning flag...). Ospina's notable works are not limited to neo-colonized remixes of Mickey Mouse... there are other icons of cultural imperialism to be challenged. Bwithh 05:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Note' I'm going to rewrite the article as a stub. I'm removing the article image which is linked from Wikicommons[1], as it does not seem to me that this is actually licensed/tagged/authenticated properly. I don't have a wikicommons account and never really used it much - if someone else does and thinks this image needs to be tagged as dubious copyright status, please do so. Bwithh 05:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Abstain This opinion is pretty much worthless, but it seemed like a nice term to follow Mixed, Mixed, Mixed, Comment, Umm, Stubify, Note. GassyGuy 05:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• REVAMP completed I've revamped the article as a new stub Bwithh 06:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Changing my vote to keep. My main objection was to the fact that the article was written by user: Nadinospina who has edited nothing else. A re-write by an established editor makes the article OK by me. -- RHaworth 06:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - rewritten page looks fine. --Zeborah 08:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, but expand. Rewrite helped. Realkyhick 08:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - Denny 14:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, neutral references, solo expositions and so on... what else does one need to establish notability? Alf photoman 15:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Doesn't seem to be notable.Tellyaddict^{Editor review!} 16:21, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep (as a stub). Existance of reliable sources almost guarantees notability. /Blaxthos 20:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. per above. —dima/s-ko/ 04:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.